Skip to main content

Full text of "Should ritualism be tolerated in the Church of England?"

See other formats






























II Peter, II. I. — "But there were false prophets also among the people,, 
even as there shall be false teachers among you." 

It is the pride and glory of the Church of England, that the 
platform upon which her true members stand, is a broad and 
liberal one ; that (unlike some o^her denominations) allowance is 
made for certain schools of thought, which differ somewhat from 
each other in their interpretation of portions of Scripture, parts 
of the Prayer Book, and the rules and regulations of the Church. 

While Rome does not make any allowance, but openly con- 
demns private judgment by her claim to infallibility ; while (like 
her) some Protestant and professedly liberal denominations 
put the dictum upon, and, if necessary, expel the unfortunate 
member who may in the slightest degree presume to differ from 
their preconceived ideas of theological truth; the Church of Eng- 
land claims to be, and is in very fact, a liberal communion, 
making fair allowances for every opinion that can even pretend to a 
foothold upon her comprehensive platform, and giving due weight 
to the utterances of the various schools of thought, that are 
embraced by her extensive boundaries. 

For this reason we find her clergy and laity divided into three 
great sections, {patties if you will,) viz. : the " Evangelical," the 
" High Church," and what is now generally known as the "Broad 
Church." Every man of common sense, must admit the exist- 
ence, within the pale, of these three parties ; must also admit 
their recognition by the Bishops and Church as a body, and 
acknowledge that they meet, and in many things work more or 
less together, though at times one may rather severely censure 
and criticize the ways and actions of the other. 

To show you how it is possible for these parties to honourably 
maintain their position in the Church, and as_an illustration of 
the scope allowed for private judgment, allow me ajfew examples,, 
though many such could be given, — 

(a) To be an honest member of the English Church, a man 
must believe in Episcopacy, but can take various views as to its 
power and authority ; one simply allowing it as a most desirable 
form of church government, but not necessarily Divine ; another 
being a firm adherent to " Apostolic Succession" and the Divine 
commencement and continuation, as links in a chain, of the 
orders of Bishops, Presbyters and Deacons. 

(b) A true Church member must believe in Infant Baptism, 
but can take two or three different views, as to the efficacy of 
Baptism, or the sense in which the word regeneration is used. 

(c) The Sacrament of the " Lord's Supper" is per se an article 
of the faith, but on the spiritual benefits derived from, and the 
express nature of the Sacrament, there are held and allowed 
different opinions. 

But be particular to observe, that, while a certain range is 
allowed for liberty of thought, there is a limit ; a line so distinctly 
marked by the Church, that the most casual observer cannot fail 
to distinguish it, arid which if a man oversteps, he ipso facto 
excommunicates himself; and though, by a law quibble, he may 
maintain his office and position, or like Bishop Colenso, who 
actually excommunicated, holds on to the temporalities of his 
See, — he is in reality no more a true member of the Church of 
England, than the most extreme dissenter that ever lived. 

It now becomes my duty, to give as examples, a few instances, in 
which the line marks off forbidden ground. 

(a) Respecting the Lord's Supper, concerning the benefits 
and nature of which, differences of opinion are, as I before 
remarked, allowed to a certain extent, — the Church distinctly 
states, that, — 

"Transubstantiation (or the change of the substance of Bread and Wine) in the 
Supper of the Lord, cannot be proved by holy writ ; but is repugnant to the 
plain words of Scripture, overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament, and hath 
given occasion to many superstitions." 

"The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was not by Christ's ordinance 
reserved, carried about, lifted up, or worshipped." — Art. XXVIII. 


"The sacrifices of Masses, in the which it was commonly said, that the 
Priest did offer Christ for the quick and the dead, to have remission of pain 
or guilt, were blasphemous fables, and dangerous deceits." — Art. XXXI. 

Once more, at the conclusion of the communion service, we 
find the following: — 

'.' No adoration is intended, or ought to be done, either unto the Sacramental 
Bread or Wine there bodily received." 

There is no mistaking the drift of this language, nothing could 
be plainer or more distinctly stated ; so a man going openly in 
violation of the above, and teaching what is thereby condemned, has 
no right to call himself a member of the Church of England, or 
remain within her communion. 

(b) Again, with regard to the state of departed souls, whatever 
views may be held, we find the following, amongst other doctrines?, 
absolutely condemned by the Church : 

"The Romish doctrine concerning Purgatory, Pardons, Worshipping and' 
Adoration, as well of images as of reliques, and also invocations of Saints, 
is a fond thing vainly invented and grounded upon no warranty of Scripture, 
but rather repugnant to the Word of God." — Art XXII. 

Then in strong opposition to the Roman doctrine of " Justifi- 
cation by works." We have the following stated, as that of the 
Church of England : 

" We are accounted righteous before God, only for the merit of our Lord 
and Saviour-Jesus Christ by Faith, and not for our own works or deservings ; 
wherefore that we are justified by Faith only, is a most wholesome doctrine 
and very full of comfort. " — Art. XI. 

" Good works which are the fruits of faith, and follow after justification, 
cannot put away our sins." — Art. XII. 

Numerous such like instances, where the Church has spoken 
decidedly, could be given, but these will answer my purpose, as 
time will not allow of my bringing all forward. 

One point now, I unflinchingly maintain, which is this : No 
honest man, standing upon the theological platform of the English 
Church, will think of preaching, within her pale, the doctrines 
held by her to be false, and openly repudiated in her Articles? 
nor will, on the other hand, neglect enforcing the doctrines pr 


■scribed. If he does either the one or the other, he has no right 
to remain, or be allowed to remain, within her communion. 

Allow me also to remark, that all sincere churchmen are 
agreed in opinion respecting the Reformation — neither the 
4( High Church," the " Evangelical," or the " Broad Church" 
schools, will call the Reformation "a mistake" They may not 
agree in sentiment with every Reformer, or approve of every act 
done; but all will maintain, that the Reformation, as an event in 
the history of our Church, was one of the most glorious that ever 
happened her communion, in its thorough purification, from all 
that we consider worse than useless in doctrine and ceremonial, 
and its establishment in our midst of u civil and religious" liberty. 

But I come now to a certain class, that hold on to the tempo- 
ralities of the church, and call themselves churchmen, though 
there will be no difficulty whatever, in proving, from their own 
.words and actions, that they are nothing more than "false 
teachers" who have as much right to remain, and as good a claim 
to the title, as any Colenso that ever took part in her services. 

The men, who make up this class, have, from thei-r teaching 
and practices, shown themselves little better than " wolves in 
sheep's clothing." They have set at defiance all law, showered 
tirades of abuse upon every one bearing the name of Protestant ; 
split up families ; ruined congregations ; published obscene and 
lewd books; have had no hesitation in denouncing the Reform- 
ation, as the greatest mistake that ever happened ; and, by both 
open and underhand practices, are boldly endeavoring to bring 
the church back to the darkness of medievalism ; men, who 
openly preach the doctrines of Rome, while eating the bread of 
a Protestant Church. 

I refer to the modern Ritualists. A few extracts from their 
writings, and a short account of some of their present practices, 
will show what claim they have to true church membership. 

Going a few years back in the Ritualistic history, we come to 
a lecture on Innovations, delivered by Dr. Littledale, in which he 
designates our Reformers as "A set of miscreants and utterly 
unredeemed villains." 

We also find one of their organs, the Church News, of Feb 
19, 1868, saying as follows : 

" What we should like to know — Has the -Church of England to do with 
the Spirit and principles of the Reformers, except to get rid of them as soon 
as possible? We will have nothing to do with such a set. " 

Another paper, the Union Review, says : 

"The work going on in England is an earnest and carefully organized 
attempt on the part of a rapidly increasing body of priests and laymen to 
bring our Church and Country up to the full standard of Catholic faith and 
practice, and eventually plead for her union with the See of St. Peter." 

"We ate weekly praying in behalf of the Holy Father, a fid for 
restored Communion with the See of St. Peter." 

The same paper, page 41 1, says, " we give the people the real 
doctrine of the Mass / the name will come by and by, so with 
regard to the cultus (worship) of the Virgin, we are one with 
Roman Catholics in faith, and we have a common foe to fight." 

Of course the foe meant, is the Protestantism of the Church. 
Again, in the " Church News/' November, 1867, there appeared 
the following : — 

"Protestantism, as a living force, as a proselytizing power, is extinct. Its 
work is done ; we must increase, Protestants must decrease. Justification by 
faith, the most immoral of Protestant dogmas, has run its tether, and happily 
died of self-strangulation. " 

In the "Church Times," (the chief English Ritualistic paper) 
of January 2Sth, 1870, appeared the following language, in 
reference to the distinctive doctrines of the Reformation, — 

"We are busy in hunting them down, and have no intention of foregoing the 
chase till we have extirpated them." * 

These Jesuits have even spoken of the thirty-nine articles (the 
Protestant character of which they do not like) as " the forty stripes 
save one." 

Coming now to our own day, I consider it hardly necessary, to 

* Note. — These quotations were also given by the Bishop of Huron in his 
bold denunciation of Ritualism before the Synod of that Diocese. — See Primary 
Address, June, 1872. 


give quotations from their various writings and speeches. Why I 
might continue doing so for hours, and still it would be the same 
language just read, and even stronger, if anything could be 
stronger, in abuse of our Protestant doctrines and principles. 
What this terrible Jesuitical party has today done for the religion 
and morality of the country, has been lately laid bare by the 
exposure of their work "The Priest in Absolution," of which the 
less said the better, for no man or woman, except utterly depraved, 
could read it without disgust and astonishment. 

To show how they endeavour to corrupt the minds of young 
children with pernicious doctrines, hear this extract taken from 
,a small work called "A first Catechism for Young Children," 
published by a member of " the Confraternity of the Blessed 
Sacrament," the Rev G. W. Berkeley, of the Parish of Allhallows r . 
Southwark : — 

Question. — What did the Saviour give the Apostles power to do ? 

Answer. — To make bread and wine into His body and blood. 

Q. — Did He give this power to any one else? 

A. — Yes, to the Bishops and Priests who came afterwards. 

Q. — How can we be freed from sin after Baptism ? 

A. — By Absolution. 

Q. — What is Absolution? 

A. — Forgiveness of sins. 

Q. — Who can give you Absolution ? 

A.— The Priest. 

Q. — W T hat is necessary before we receive it ? 

A. — Penance. 

Q. — How can we insure Penance ? 

A. — By confessing our sins. 

Q. — What is it to confess our sins ? 

A. — To tell them one by one. 

Comment is unnecessary — there we have transubstantiation, 
Penance, Priestly Confession and Absolution openly taught , the 
fact speaks for itself, and clearly shows that no toleration should 
be shown these men, by a Protestant laity and clergy. 

Almost everything, in the shape of literature, we find stealthily 
poisoned with their dangerous dogmas. 

The following quotations, are from a Ritualistic historical work, 
introduced some years ago, as a text-book, into a Canadian Evan- 


gelical Divinity College ; but has been wisely rejected for some 
time. In speaking of the primitive church, it says : 

"The Holy Eucharist was to the Church then as it is still, the chief act and 
centre of Divine worship. In this neiu sacrifice the Apostles showed forth and 
pleaded before God, the one sufficient sacrifice, which they themselves had 
seen once offered." 

"The ritual of the early Church naturally gathered round the Holy 
Eucharist as the central Act of worship" — Blunt's Key to Ancient Church 
History, pages 14 and 56. 

But enough of these doctrinal quotations, to prove that they do 
not in reality belong to our Protestant Church. So let me now 
give you a slight sketch of the services, these would-be priests 
are so fond of holding, and see how much in accordance they 
are, with the genuine Anglican customs. 

If you attend the services, of a High-Church clergyman, or 
congregation, you will not find a vast amount of difference be- 
tween them, and those held by the Low Church party. You may 
probably see a few more emblems, and a little more decoration 
about the building, than the strict Evangelical would admire. 
You may find the service partly choral, but that practice is also 
followed in many of the other churches ; neither is it a point 
upon which a clergyman should (in my mind) have any dispute 
with his people. Some like a little more music and singing 
such as chanting the Psalms and responses ; others are 
better satisfied with a plain service, like our own. I think it is a 
very foolish thing, for any one, to make this a matter of principle. 
If the majority think they can worship better with the one service 
than the other, by all means let them have it. The chief differ- 
ence, you may find, between the High Church and Evangelical, 
vVill be in the preaching, when more stress is usually laid by the 
former, upon the importance of the various services, the minis- 
try, and a little more upon the benefits and nature of the Sacra- 
ments, than is the case with the latter. But a Ritualist, and his 
service, is beyond anything you can imagine for the Church of 
England. Here is an account of a communion service (the mass 
of the Ritualist) held at St. Peter's, London Docks, England, a 
few weeks ago, as given by the correspondent of the Standard : 


" The Vicar and assistant Priests wore vestments of pea-green satin, relieved 
by trimmings of marone velvet. At the early portion of the service, four 
large candles at either side of the altar were lighted, but when the act of 
consecration was approaching two additional large candles and sixteen smaller, 
seven at each side of the altar, were lighted, so that twenty-two lighted tapers 
blazed upon the Communion Table, when, amid clouds of incense, Mr. 
Lowder elevated, for the adoration of his flock, the Sacramental elements. 
At the proper time for announcements, Mr. Lowder stated that those wishing 
to come to confession should leave their names at the Church, and he then 
asked the prayers of the faithful for the rest of some departed souls. 

11 The congregation exhibited all the signs of great devotion, every one 
bowing down low at the elevation, when, on the altar steps, the choristers 
rang hand-bells, and outside the bell of the church tolled loudly. " 

Well, some may say, that is in England, and is bad enough, 
but surely in this country, they have never ventured so far? 
Never indeed ! Why, you will find very nearly as bad in Montreal I* 
while in Toronto, a few would like to come out in full "Milliner/ 1 
if they could safely do so, but read the account of the Press 
excursion, as given in the Belleville " Ontario Chronicle" of 
Friday, August 24th, 1877, and vouched for as a correct state- 
ment : 

"Being in the City of Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, and being 
anxious to attend morning service, we enquired for the English Church. 
Having been directed, we repaired thither, and upon entering the Church we 
thought we must have made a mistake, that we had gone into a Catholic 
Church. Such, however, was not the case. The service was thoroughly 
Ritualistic or rather we should say Romish. During the celebration of the 
Communion, the Rector officiated clad in the vestments of a Priest. He wore 
over his surplice a green chasuble and colored stole, during the celebration 48 
candles were lighted on and about the altar, which was highly and elaborately 
ornamented. Four clergymen were seated within the chancel and the officiating 
clergyman was attended by two young lads who continually kept moving about 
him and bowing before the altar. The wafer bread and chalice were elevated, 
as we presumed, for the adoration of the worshippers, who were continually 
crossing themselves during the service. The service being ended, the choristers, 
acolytes and clergy marched out in procession, preceded by a young man 
bearing a cross." 

And yet these are the t?aitors, that a Bishop of the Church bf 
England, a few days ago, in a sermon preached before the 

* — Church of St. John the Evangelist. 


" Provincial Synod" in the Protestant Cathedral at Montreal, 
asked toleration for / You are perhaps surprised, that I, a young 
Presbyter in the Church, should say a word against that sermon, 
or speak disparagingly of anything a Bishop may choose to advance, 
but thank God for the Church of England's liberal boundaries, 
that do not bind our tongues in this respect, and though I may 
be censured for the act, I have no hesitation in warning my 
people against the dangerous teaching of that sermon, which is 
being so largely circulated throughout the country. One question 
asked me at my Ordination included the words — " Will you be 
ready with all faithful diligence, to banish and drive away all 
erroneous and strange doctrines contrary to God's word ?" 

To which the answer was, " I will, the Lord being my helper." 
So, if I neglect, at the present moment, to warn you against that 
sermon, and the party whose claims it advocates, I would consi- 
der myself answerable to the Almighty for a violation of my most 
solemn promise. 

"Why," says the Bishop of Fredericton (the author of the 
sermon alluded to,) "why," " if those who call themselves Evan- 
gelical — if those who call themselves High Churchmen, and those 
in ho suppose themselves to be men of broader sympathies than their 
brethren, can work together in the same church for the common weal, 
in Synods, in Conferences, in Congress, at Consecrations and Holy 
Commimions, why should the Ritualist be excluded ?" 

Because, as has been shown from his own words and actions, 
the Ritualist is not a Churchman at all." He has proved himself 
in sympathy with another communion, and what true Churchmen 
ask him to do is, Go there ; leave us alone. 

The Bishop feels deeply for the poor persecuted Jesuits, and 
will not justify any harsh or uncharitable expressions toward 
them. He makes, as he says, " great allowance fo? the feelings 
of men who, thoroughly in earnest themselves, devoted to hard 
and often ili-paid wotk, seek to attract and to christianize rude 
and half heathen populatio?is ; and having succeeded in this 
arduous task, and ??iade up congregations of most promising 
materials, who are devoutly attached to their pastors, and delight 


in a service in which they can all join, find themselves persecuted 
by people who send hired spies to watch, not to worship, in their 

The Bishop is quite correct in his statement, as to the Ritualists 
having " made up congregations, devoutly attached to their 
pastors," and who " delight in a service in which they can all 
join." But unfortunately for the Church of England, few of 
these congregations are within her communion. We may thank the 
Ritualists, for helping to build up, and sending reinforcements, to 
the ranks of the Presbyterians, Baptists and Methodists, for the 
" Reformed Episcopal" denomination, and the many other sects 
he has been so zealous in building up, not to mention the 
thousands, he has sent over to Rome ; while so far as the 
experience and observation of most people go, the Church of 
England when taken in hand by Ritualism, has in most instances 
quietly rotted out. 

Time will not permit my taking up the whole of this notorious 
defence of men, whose words and deeds have shown them utterly 
unworthy of the confidence of true churchmen, or indeed good 
people of any denomination. 

We can respect the honest Roman Catholic, you can grasp his 
hand, with the confidence of knowing what he is, but can we do 
that with the man who, is endeavouring to impose upon us ? indeed 
no ! If the Ritualists were honest, they would, believing as they 
do, that Roman doctrine is right and Protestantism wrong, — go 
over to the Roman Church, or at least leave the Church of Eng- 
land, like that good man, yes still, (I believe,) a good man, if he is 
. a Roman Catholic, the Rev. John Henry Newman, or the pres- 
sent Cardinal Manning, and many others. We can at least give 
these men the credit of sincerity, even if we hold them grossly 
mistaken, but the Ritualist, overturner of our religion and mor- 
ality! Shame to the Churchman who shows him any quarter : — 

In the face of all their unlawful actions — in the face of the 
numbers they have driven from the Church — in the face of their 
late immoral, loathsome publication, the " Priest in Absolution," 
we are surprised that any one, (especially a Bishop,) should plead 
for such men. The Bishop of Fredericton, has not only proved 


himself a Ritualist of the worst stamp, and by his sermen 
virtually read himself out of the Ptotestant Church of England, 
but any man, who takes that document as a specimen of church- 
teaching, and confesses compliance with its sentiments, places 
himself on the same list, and countenances the upholders of the 
"Priest and the altar, the sacrifice of the Mass, the confessional, 
penance, and last but not least, " The Priest in Absolution." 
Yes, places himself on the list with Teachers false to the 
principles and doctrines of the Church, who would, by their 
" priestcraft," subvert and destroy, not only the foundations of 
our Protestantism, but the peace, unity and welfare which should 
prevail in every christian congregation. 

My brethren, if I have spoken rather strongly, pardon me, but 
I feel there is much at stake, and the time has now come, when a 
man must take a stand one way or the other. There can be no 
compromise ; so while some may see proper, to scatter through- 
out the country the poisonous seeds of Ritualism, under the 
shelter and with the aid of Episcopal utterances, I must be allowed 
to proclaim to my people, my humble but solemn protest, against 
the same. 

Beware then, of these false teachers who shall be among you, as 
there were false prophets amongst those of olden time. 

Note. — The reader is referred to the Toronto Mail, of Wednesday 
last, — English News Column, for an example of the "Second ReJormation, ,, 
some of these men would bring about, in the Church.